The April Fools Contest is now open for Reading and Voting. Have Fun!
Hide
Home Β» Forum Β» Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Where Does Public Safety End And Authoritarianism Just For Its Sake Begin?

writernumber7 🚫

I read with alarm about the latest attack on free thought in the former england, now a province of sharia law.

The clowns pretending to be british police arrested a couple for "content posted on social media that was unsupportive of school board policies."

What was once a thriving empire has reduced itself to servant of stupidity and mid 1300's repression. Their ability to thrive as a nations was lost decades ago, now their membership as a free nation is gone along with it.

The repressive regime always destroys free expression as the sharing of information without chaperones leads to ideas that fail to align with the regime. We are seeing the beginning of such repression as our expression is suddenly being limited and controlled by non government entities, that are substitutes for the coming regime.

The best thing for free people to do is to speak, write, create, share, and support freedom of expression and do so loud and without apology. To sit down and shut up is exactly what the coming cabal is hoping will become the new normal.

Anne N. Mouse 🚫

@writernumber7

You're not allowed to tell the truth if the truth isn't what the government wants you to say!!

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

Do you have a source for this story? As a Brit, I've not seen it and follow the news closely, so that surprises me. I'd like to learn more.

It's almost always the case with this type of story that what you think (or have been told) has happened hasn't actually happened. I'd like to look into this further to find out the actual circumstances.

Do not believe what the US media (particularly "right-leaning" media) tell you about the UK. Actually, don't believe most of what the British "right-wing" media tell you either. Especially the Daily Mail. It isn't true. We don't live under sharia law (or "Shakira" law as I've seen one idiot call it. Actually, "Shakira" law might be fun with all that hip wiggling).

Our Free Speech is not being impinged. I can quite happily go on Twitter and call the Prime Minister a "Fucking Arsehole" and not get arrested. I know this to be true because I have done so. Repeatedly.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Hi, so, I've been sent the link to the story and read it. The story comes from the parents involved, who were arrested but ultimately released without charge.

They obviously feel aggrieved (as you would) and have gone to the press to put across their side of he story.

There's an interesting point in the story about the complainant - "Mr Allen, who is a producer at Times Radio,"

Times Radio is owned by Rupert Murdoch. The story was first reported in The Times (also owned by Murdoch). That already make me suspicious of the motivations of the story.

It's also worth mentioning the School's response

"We sought advice from the police following a high volume of direct correspondence and public social media posts from two parents, as this was becoming upsetting for staff, parents and governors. We're always happy for parents to raise concerns, but we do ask that they do this in a suitable way, and in line with the school's published complaints procedure."

And the Police's response

"Following reports of harassment and malicious communications, which are criminal offences, a man and a woman from Borehamwood, both aged in their forties, were arrested on Wednesday 29 January. The arrests were necessary to fully investigate the allegations as is routine in these types of matters. Following further investigations, officers deemed that no further action should be taken due to insufficient evidence. In relation to the police visit on 20 December, a complaint was submitted, which was reviewed by our Professional Standards Department. It was deemed that the service provided by officers was appropriate."

So, basically, a couple, one of whom used to be on the Board of Governors, wasn't happy with the process to recruit a new Headteacher and then acted in a way that could have been interpreted as harassment towards the school staff and the school took action to protect it staff. The police took appropriate action, investigated, and decided there were no charges to be brought and dropped the matter.

But the parents were upset about it, so they went to the press.

That's itβ€”that's all it is. This isn't "Sharia Law" (or even "Shakira Law"). It isn't the fall of Britain. It's the police responding to a complaint, doing their job, investigating, and deciding no further action is warranted.

awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

It seems that all sides were at fault. The school failed to follow their recruitment procedure in a timely and transparent manner, and failed to engage with the parents when they raised their concerns. That led to the parents escalating their complaints to the point of nuisance. And then the police went in mob handed.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

That's my take too. And it just so happens that one of the parents works for Murdoch, and his organisations will do anything for a story.

Click bait at its finest.

solreader50 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

That's itβ€”that's all it is. This isn't "Sharia Law" (or even "Shakira Law"). It isn't the fall of Britain. It's the police responding to a complaint, doing their job, investigating, and deciding no further action is warranted.

For the second time today I thank someone, in this case you, for providing facts to destroy the lies. This FAKE NEWS is insidious because so many idiots accept it without question.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@solreader50

Thanks.

The frustrating thing is, it doesn't actually take much effort to find these things out. It's just that many people would rather believe their "heroes", who are telling them that their deeply held (but usually deeply hidden) prejudices are, in fact, perfectly valid.

Here's a post from my website mid-March on the subject that I think you might enjoy reading.

https://marcnobbs.co.uk/wp/may-you-live-in-interesting-internet-times/

sunseeker 🚫

@writernumber7

there's always 2 sides to every story...and sadly the msm, both right and left leaning, cannot be trusted to tell the unvarnished truth...it's pretty much always slanted to fit their agenda...but that just my 2 centavos and opinion

SunSeeker

Replies:   solreader50
solreader50 🚫

@sunseeker

there's always 2 sides to every story

Yes the one with truth and facts and the one with fake news to make a propaganda point. The latter, when repeated often enough "becomes" fact and destroys society.

writernumber7 🚫

@writernumber7

It is always easier to look for a way to avoid the ugly truth about one's government, if excusing authoritarian encroachment is preferable to directly confronting the facts.
The FACT that the speech police ARRESTED a couple because their objections were considered unsupportive of the school board chills other people from speaking unapproved objections.
The slippery slope strategy is what has ruined what once was an empire.
Who wants the moronic speech police showing up with SIX officers and arresting a couple because in the minds of totalitarian socialists that is how you 'investigate' written comments?
The world has watched the destruction from within as england has been invaded by muslims thru weakness and ignorance by the clown car government, much like it was here under the senile, imposter, biden and the equally disloyal obama.
Fortunately, the current leadership had slammed breaks on the invasion of illegals here and has started kicking them out. I expect the open border policies of the former british empire will welcome many of the muslim and chinese illegals we turn out.
Either way, pretending that arresting people just so you can 'investigate' their unsupportive speech is the type of stupidity that is destroying what was once a friend and worthy ally and is now looking like the next nation to succumb to destruction by political correctness.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Gauthier
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

Everything you've written here is bollocks. Utter, complete bollocks.

How do I know? I live here.

Are you telling me that what you read in bias media in a another country trumps my lived experience?

We are not being invaded. We are not being overwhelmed. It's simply not true.

Lumpy 🚫
Updated:

@Marc Nobbs

As someone living in the US (and in texas so near the border in question), the same is true of his statements about here. We weren't being invaded either or overwhelmed either.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Grey Wolf
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Lumpy

It's not true of France or Germany either. But it's part of a long used playbook by a certain type of political figure to garner support.

Its quite sad that people fall for it.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Its quite sad that people fall for it.

What's sad is that people still fall for it, despite the complete lack of evidence. As they say, "Those who don't learn from history, are bound to repeat it" (Hegel's Philosophy of History).

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

From Bertrand Russell who died in 1970...

"The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world, the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."

This isn't a new phenomenon - we just encounter it more in today's hyper-connected world.

I particularly appreciate Russell's quote because of the notion that doubt accompanies intelligence. This inherent questioning, the hallmark of critical thinking, seems intrinsically linked to intelligence itself. The intelligent question, verify, and demand evidence rather than simply placing their trust in figures they admire - which is a far easier thing to do today when you're bombarded by those figures on social media all the time.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@Lumpy

To be fair, some border communities in Texas were absolutely being overwhelmed by legal immigrants (people claiming asylum are legal immigrants under US law until their case is properly adjudicated). But the reasons that happened are almost entirely unrelated to what the 'conservative' media claimed.

Once you get away from the border a few hundred miles, there were far fewer 'illegals' 2021-2024 than 2017-2019. A whole bunch left during COVID-19 and almost none were replaced by new 'illegals'. Businesses that depended on 'illegals' struggled mightily in recent years, and the current situation is likely going to be disastrous for many businesses.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't uphold the law, but it's been decades that we've known we need 'guest workers', yet haven't done anything about actually creating a workable system for it. Instead, it's just a political football.

Replies:   Lumpy  solreader50
Lumpy 🚫

@Grey Wolf

I agree, we need to have a better system and I do think we should uphold the law, but every time I hear "wide open border" and "invasion" I have to wonder if any of these people have spent any time on the border, cause I have, and nothing that I hear getting spewed is reality.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@Lumpy

The people who were saying 'wide open border' and 'invasion' had a vested interest in saying those things, not only because they appealed to their base but because saying them kept people coming. The only group of people who were saying 'the border is wide open - everyone can just come right in' were the group of people who ostensibly didn't want that. Spreading that message caused a lot of people to come seeking asylum who wouldn't have done so without that message being out there.

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@Grey Wolf

As of the most recent count there are 2.1 million illegals who were issued voter ID in leftist states.
That is enough illegal votes to sway almost any election especially with as vested as the democrat party is in vote fraud.

Replies:   Lumpy  Grey Wolf
Lumpy 🚫

@writernumber7

This is not a real number by any stretch of the imagination. Some local (like 4 cities) elections allow for non-citizens (not illegals, but legal non-citizen residents like asylum seekers) to vote in local elections, but Federal and State elections you must be a citizen to vote, and no state has given out a voter ID for that. To say that 2.1 million do is a straight up lie.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@Lumpy

There were probably 250,000+ issued just here in AZ.

Replies:   Lumpy
Lumpy 🚫

@jimq2

No.There weren't. The number he is quoting (and probably you are basing your number on, unless you just made it up for vibes) is a misunderstanding of the SSN verification database. Even the Texas Secretary of State, not exactly a democrat, said those numbers were wrong.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@Lumpy

For the last 30 years we have been seeing people that weren't eligible for SS cards trying to use voter registration cards for ID's for loans. Every single one of them had registered for the Democrat party.

Replies:   Lumpy
Lumpy 🚫

@jimq2

Who's we? "Every single one" makes me think no, because nothing is ever 100%. And you're telling me every person in your state who takes lones has marked down when someone tried to use a voter registration card and marked down what party they were registered for in these circumstances. This feels a lot like "I read this online and didn't question the information" kind of statement.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@Lumpy

I am speaking from my personal experience. I was processing loan apps starting in '98. Every single voter ID card I saw, and I saw hundreds, showed the party as Democrat. The local Democrat party was holding voter registration drives in the barrios and signing people up without even checking for any identification. My office was 15 miles from where many of these people lived and there were many offices closer.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Lumpy
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@jimq2

Every single voter ID card I saw, and I saw hundreds, showed the party as Democrat.

This feels so intensely weird to me - to have your party allegiance written on your voter card. I don't understand the reasoning for it. Does it not defeat the purpose of a secret ballot on election day? And is it not dangerous, leaving electors open to intimidation if their voting intention is publicly available?

We often have people working for one party or the other standing outside a polling station on polling day, asking who you intend to vote for (or who you voted for if they catch you on the way out) and I'm well within my rights as a voter to tell them to fuck off, my vote is private, thank you very much.

Dominions Son 🚫
Updated:

@Marc Nobbs

This feels so intensely weird to me - to have your party allegiance written on your voter card. I don't understand the reasoning for it.

It has to do with how the parties select their nominees for various offices in the US.

There are two basic methods. A caucus and a primary. A primary is a preliminary election to select the party's nominee by voting.

The two major parties have arranged things so that the state election apparatus runs the party primaries in primary states (there are only a couple of states that still use caucuses.

In the US, there are two distinct types of primaries. Open primaries where anyone can vote in any party's primary. Or closed primaries where you can only vote in the primary of one party.

Closed primary states require you to state which party when you register. If you register with no party affiliation in a closed primary state, you don't get to vote in the primaries at all.

If you want to change from voting in the Democrat primary to the Republican primary in a closed primary state you have to change your voter registration.

In a closed primary state that requires a dedicated voter ID (as opposed to a DL), it makes sense that the party you registered for would be on the voter ID.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Paladin_HGWT
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Dominions Son

That seems like a better system than we have where the local party membership (usually a few dozen people) pick the candidate based on if they knew Auntie Doris or once played rugby with uncle Keith's cousin's babysitter.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

That seems like a better system than we have where the local party membership (usually a few dozen people) pick the candidate based on if they knew Auntie Doris or once played rugby with uncle Keith's cousin's babysitter.

That's kind of how a caucus works. :)

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Dominions Son

Closed primary states require you to state which party when you register. If you register with no party affiliation in a closed primary state, you don't get to vote in the primartravesty!

There might be an exception. However, in most (all) states and localities that have partisan primaries, a registered voter without affiliation may still vote in nonpartisan races, and/or ballot initiatives, such as school levies, etc.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

There might be an exception. However, in most (all) states and localities that have partisan primaries, a registered voter without affiliation may still vote in nonpartisan races, and/or ballot initiatives, such as school levies, etc.

The restriction I was referring to only applies to party primaries in a closed primary state. So yeah, non-partisan elections aren't affected, but I wouldn't consider than an exception because you aren't talking about a party primary. The same goes for anything else you list that isn't a party primary.

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

This feels so intensely weird to me - to have your party allegiance written on your voter card. I don't understand the reasoning for it.

This is done on a state by state basis.

"Unaffiliated" and other options besides Democrat or GOP/Republican, are available.

My state, Washington, doesn't have party affiliation.

The purpose is (primarily) for Primary Elections that determine the Candidates for particular parties. Primary Elections are supposed to be for the members of particular parties to choose Their Candidates.

Shenanigans, such as people voting for a bad candidate in the party they are opposed to. Sometimes voting for a person who is not actually a member of the party; sometimes to influence opinions in other districts, or even other states. Such as voting for a member of the KKK, then running ads: see They voted for the racist!

To be clear: in General Elections any registered voter may vote for Any Candidate(s) of any party for each particular office. So, a person could vote GOP for President, Democrat for Governor, a Socialist for Congress, and Green Party for Lands Commissioner, and a non-partisan for City Council, all on the same ballot.

I am in favor of having Partisan Voter registration, because we have poor enough choices already! Shenanigans to deliberately vote for bad candidates is detrimental.

In most states a person may register in 30 days, or less.

In Washington state a person may register to vote on the day of the election; then vote immediately after having registered. There is no checking if they are a Citizen, or have voted elsewhere!

In Washington state "Absolutely No One" Macky Mouse, Goofy, Donald Duck, and Joseph Stalin, are all Registered Voters, as well as several pet dogs and cats. Those are just the known travesties!

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

In Washington state a person may register to vote on the day of the election; then vote immediately after having registered. There is no checking if they are a Citizen, or have voted elsewhere!

In Washington state "Absolutely No One" Macky Mouse, Goofy, Donald Duck, and Joseph Stalin, are all Registered Voters, as well as several pet dogs and cats. Those are just the known travesties!

We have a far smaller population, of course--just over 70m--but it does seem that our system of maintaining the electoral roll is "better".

Once a year, correspondence is sent to the registered "primary" resident of each address and it's their legal responsibility to check and confirm who is registered to vote at that address, remove any that shouldn't be there and add any that should.

That happens every year.

That said, I don't know how it happens today when you move house. You used to have to register your new address at the town hall, but i guess now you can do it online. But it's been fifteen years since I last moved house, so I'm not certain.

Lumpy 🚫

@jimq2

See, saying you can remember hundreds of voter ID cards over decades and remember the party on all of them is wildly hard to believe.

It seems like the kind of lie someone makes themselves believe, the kind of thing that makes prosecutors say that witnesses are often poor evidence because they remember what they want and not what actually happened.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son 🚫

@Lumpy

See, saying you can remember hundreds of voter ID cards over decades and remember the party on all of them is wildly hard to believe.

And why would people be using their voter ID to apply for a loan?

Replies:   jimq2  Paladin_HGWT
jimq2 🚫

@Dominions Son

Because they had no other form of ID. It seemed odd to me too, that all the ones I saw showed "Political Party" as being Democrat. It was later explained that the Republicans were no soliciting voters in the barrio, and therefore did not run into the immigrants. The Democrats were using forms that already had Democrat marked for party preference. The AZ Secretary of State has been in the process of removing thousands of non-citizens from the voter registration lists.

Replies:   Lumpy
Lumpy 🚫

@jimq2

AZ Secretary of State has been in the process of removing thousands of non-citizens from the voter registration lists

This isn't true. AZ is one of the few states that actually verifies citizenship before adding someone to the voter rolls. There are not thousands of non-citizens on the voter lists.

Replies:   DBActive
DBActive 🚫

@Lumpy

No, Arizona was barred from requiring proof of citizenship for Federal elections by the 9th Circuit. They can still require it for state elections.

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Dominions Son

And why would people be using their voter ID to apply for a loan?

Because the State Government has qualified such a document for such purposes.

In Washington state a person may use a Utility Bill for such a purpose.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@writernumber7

If I understand you correctly, your theory is that illegal aliens - who live in fear of law enforcement catching them and removing them from the country - are nevertheless going to go through the work of:
1) Getting an ID which will work for the purpose of issuing a voter registration, including faking citizenship
2) Then putting their information into a state database, including their address (necessary to get their voter ID)
3) So they can then go to a government-sponsored location and attempt to vote, while
4) Republicans have been sending out great numbers of poll watchers and such

Yeah - not buying it.

Heck, even the Heritage Foundation says that only 68 cases of non-citizen voting have been found since 1980, despite extensive investigations, including massive statistical analysis of voter databases.

68 cases isn't going to swing many elections, and that's over four decades in multiple states.

The notion that 'the democrat party' is 'vested [] in vote fraud' is a wonderful example of 'fake news', though. Any 'news source' who reports that is basically waving a giant flag saying 'We are not serious and you cannot expect us to tell you the truth.'

DBActive 🚫

@Grey Wolf

t illegal aliens - who live in fear of law enforcement catching them and removing them from the country - are nevertheless going to go through the work of:
1) Getting an ID which will work for the purpose of issuing a voter registration, including faking citizenship
2) Then putting their information into a state database, including their address (necessary to get their voter ID)
3) So they can then go to a government-sponsored location and attempt to vote, while
4) Republicans have been sending out great nu

There were 68 prosecutions for illegal voting not that 68 people were found to be registered to vote.

In many states there is no ID required for voting other than a lease, bank statement or utility bill. In other states non-citizens, legal and illegal, can receive a DL during which process they are either automatically registered to vote or can register to vote by checking a box on a form.
There are over 40 million non-citizens in the country, concentrated in a few states. Assuming about 70% are over 18 (the immigrant population skews much older in age than citizens) That leaves 28 million. If a small percentage vote illegally, intentionally or not, that could easily
elections.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@DBActive

If a small percentage vote illegally, intentionally or not, that could easily
elections.

My point is that the evidence suggests that 'small percentage' is in fractions of a percent range, at most.

That 40 million number is incorrect. There are 48 million people in the US (estimated) who were not born in the US. Just about half of those are now US citizens by naturalization. Of the remainder, over half are legal residents, ones who would be thrown out on their ear if the registered to vote.

So, your pool is really about 11 million (or the estimated 'illegal' population of the US, down from 13ish million in 2019).

And, of that pool, you then have to factor out the under-18s (as you did). According to the data I have, the non-citzen pool skews considerably younger than citizens, too.

Now, average out that pool over 40 years. Figure an average illegal and at-risk-for-losing-legal-status pool of maybe 10 million people, and we'll assume an average of 1 federal election a year (house, senate, presidency). That's 400 million chances for someone to vote illegally.

We have some evidence that 68 people did so. Many of those weren't federal, though.

Your 'small percentage' is 0.000000017%. Let's assume this is utterly rampant and we miss 10,000 cases for every one we catch (which is exceptionally unlikely). In that case, your 'small percentage' is %0.0017.

The odds that any elections are being skewed is ridiculously low, in other words. We have far bigger fish to fry than that.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't bother checking citizenship, but - if we are going to check citizenship - it should be quick, easy, and no-cost for citizens to prove citizenship. That means no trips to offices, no standing in line, no filing fees, etc. Otherwise, we're just going back to a modified 'poll tax' system.

writernumber7 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Using pathetic rationalizations and expecting anyone to take you seriously is truly fake logic.

Replies:   Grey Wolf  Paladin_HGWT
Grey Wolf 🚫

@writernumber7

Using pathetic rationalizations and expecting anyone to take you seriously is truly fake logic.

Absolutely, and you should stop doing it at once.

The difference is that I use facts and logic, something you seem entirely unwilling to attempt.

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@writernumber7

Using pathetic rationalizations and expecting anyone to take you seriously is truly fake logic.

While I sometimes don't agree with Grey Wolf, and I believe some of his assertions are incorrect.

Grey Wolf is Honest, Well Informed, and discusses matters in a respectable manner.

#7 this particular statement (and at least parts of other posts in this thread) do no credit to your arguments. I say this a person who, to a degree, shares your concerns.

There are others who just post drivel. Grey Wolf is not one of those! I read the Forums to gain other perspectives (and for amusement).

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Getting an ID which will work for the purpose of issuing a voter registration, including faking citizenship

Grey Wolf, we don't always agree, but I respect your ability to conduct research, that informs your opinions.

I recommend you do a little (more) research on some of these matters. The numbers are far more than "68" people in the USA illegally obtaining documents that permit them to vote in Federal (and State) elections in the USA. [For now I am not counting localities that permit any Resident, citizen or not, to vote in local elections.]

The state of Oregon performed an audit recently that revealed that at least 6,400 people in the USA illegally had been Registered to Vote πŸ—³ in Oregon.

The numbers in the state of Washington are unknown, but virtually certain to be many more. In Washington state it is Against the law for any government officials to even ask about citizenship, let alone require any documentation. Furthermore, it is Required that any person receiving a Washington State Driver's License MUST be given a Registration to Vote and it is illegal to warn them it is a federal violation of law! Some people seeking (legal) citizenship have fallen afoul by having been Registered to Vote before it was Legal for them to do so.

State laws that may result in a person illegally Registered to Vote, does not protect them from having violated Federal Laws. Thus, politicians and activists "claiming to be helping foreigners" here legally or not, too often harm them.

Related are issues about Citizens with a Washington State Driver's License, even an "enhanced driver's license" not being able to use it for ID to enter some Federal facilities, or to board a commercial airline flight. I have been told this may be an issue when taking a cruise ship to international ports.

It is an issue when traveling to Canada!

To be clear: it is uncertain if any of these individuals sought to be able to vote illegally. It is certain that thousands have voted, most at least claiming that they believed they had the right to vote, as they had been issued a voters' registration card.

solreader50 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Businesses that depended on 'illegals' struggled mightily in recent years, and the current situation is likely going to be disastrous for many businesses.

It has always been my assumption that ...

(a) The strength of protest about illegal immigrants, or indeed immigrants in general is in inverse proportion to the number of immigrants in a community. That certainly seems to be case here in the UK and in Germany.

(b) Californian agriculture would collapse without the seasonal immigrant workers from Mexico. Many used to be illegal but I'm not up to date on the current situation.

Am I near the mark or way off in my assumptions.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@solreader50

The first I can't answer. Might be true.

The second is definitely true, and it's not just California. Texas agriculture (and much of the oil and gas industry) would collapse as well. Florida agriculture is already very hard-hit.

And it's not just agriculture. Home-building, roofing, remodeling, landscaping, and elder care would be very hard-hit or collapse as well.

Again, none of that means we shouldn't enforce laws. But we shouldn't have laws that, if fully enforced (or perhaps 'overly enforced'), would effectively gut important industries and leave things undone that could easily be done with sane policies.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  redthumb
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Grey Wolf

And it's not just agriculture. Home-building, roofing, remodeling, landscaping, and elder care would be very hard-hit or collapse as well.

We're seeing a similar thing with citizens from the EU countries leaving after Brexit and causing shortages in agriculture, hospitality, social care and other fields that British workers just aren't interested in (usually because they don't pay well enough)

Ordinarily, you'd have expected the market to correct the wages in those areas to attract staff, but it hasn't - the jobs have gone unfilled instead.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

It's likely impossible for the market to correct wages enough, because a lot of those businesses can't be profitable if wages go up enough to pay citizen workers. There's not enough flexibility to raise prices. Other sources of food will move in, social care depends on payers with limited means, hospitality can only go so high before people choose 'staycations', and so forth.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Many of the industries with shortages are very much minimum wage jobs. And yes, the margins are tight and in many cases profits low. It's one reason we are seeing so many pub closures, for example - they just aren't making any money.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

It's the same reason we've seen a major drop in the number of contractors, roofers, remodelers, landscapers, and so forth recently. It was amusing - deeply sad, but amusing - to hear about the 'massive influx in illegals' in recent years while businesses that rely on 'illegals' were being gutted to the enormous factual drop in the number of 'illegals' who were actually in the country.

redthumb 🚫

@Grey Wolf

From a historical perspective in this the same basic argument that the congressmen used in the 1840's and the 1850's?

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@solreader50

(a) The strength of protest about illegal immigrants, or indeed immigrants in general is in inverse proportion to the number of immigrants in a community. That certainly seems to be case here in the UK and in Germany.

It's certainly true that areas with the least ethnic diversity were most likely to vote to leave the EU.

Another reason for this may be (and I don't know if research has been done on this) that the more highly educated (who were more likely to vote remain) tended to live and work in areas with higher diversity (mainly larger cities), leaving the less well educated in the less diverse areas that voted leave.

Michael Loucks 🚫

@solreader50

(b) Californian agriculture would collapse without the seasonal immigrant workers from Mexico.

The exact opposite of the argument made by Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers when they campaigned to deport 'wetbacks' (his word) in the 60s.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@Michael Loucks

Most of the legal Hispanics in Phoenix wish that the illegals would go home.

writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

It was your own government that threatened to come after Americans who who spoke plainly on social media about a muslim gang that raped a child.
Pretending that your government is leading your former nation to ruin is comforting right up until it is not.
Just ask the families of American women raped and murdered by illegal aliens here and defended by elements of our rotting government, leading to a sweeping defeat of the far left in our last election.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

It was your own government that threatened to come after Americans who who spoke plainly on social media about a muslim gang that raped a child.

Source please?

solreader50 🚫

@writernumber7

It was your own government that threatened to come after Americans who who spoke plainly on social media about a muslim gang that raped a child.

And what is the source of that story? Because it sound like absolute bollox to me. Even the Daily Excess and the Daily Fail didn't go for that one.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@solreader50

Even the Daily Excess and the Daily Fail didn't go for that one.

Get it right, it's the Daily Heil! 😁

Replies:   solreader50
solreader50 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Get it right, it's the Daily Heil! 😁

Grovel, grovel. You're correct. That's it's proper name.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@solreader50

Have you heard of the podcast "Origin Story"? There's an episode on the history of the Mail. It's really interesting.

GreyWolf 🚫

@writernumber7

Just ask the families of American women raped and murdered by illegal aliens here

First, every rape and murder is deplorable, regardless of who commits it.

But, second, the rate at which 'illegal aliens' commit rape and murder is a small fraction of the rate at which citizens commit rape and murder. Statistically, the average person is safer the more 'illegal aliens' we have (though, yes, that's certainly arguably a misuse of statistics).

What led to a 'sweeping defeat' is false statements, by and large, combined with an ignorant population that believed those false statements without evidence. Your comment is a perfect example of that.

Replies:   DBActive  writernumber7
DBActive 🚫

@GreyWolf

There is no way of knowing how many crimes are committed by illegals. Many, many jurisdictions refuse to question anyone concerning their status.
Of course there is the fact that every illegal is illegal: it is a crime to enter the country without authorization. In addition, almost all work in violation of the law, often by employers who use their illegal status to avoid payment of taxes.

Replies:   Lumpy  Grey Wolf
Lumpy 🚫

@DBActive

Being in the country without permission is a civil offense in the US, and not criminal. It's only criminal if they are removed once and come back.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@DBActive

There is no way of knowing how many crimes are committed by illegals. Many, many jurisdictions refuse to question anyone concerning their status.

Yet we seem to track it pretty well in the case of culprits of violent crime. Interesting state of affairs.

Of course there is the fact that every illegal is illegal

A relatively pointless tautology. Every asylum seeker is legal, not illegal, and 95%+ of those who entered from 2021-2024 were asylum seekers. Very, very few 'illegals' crossed during that time.

In addition, almost all work in violation of the law

That is absolutely true, and we need (and have needed, for decades) reform of those laws, because without 'illegal' labor many things would collapse that people depend on.

And I agree about tax avoidance - another reason we need reform of those laws. The net tax impact of 'illegals' is enormously positive for America, though - they pay far more in taxes than they use in services. Ironically, regularizing their status in terms of a guest worker program or the like would likely diminish their positive effect on our tax system, but it still would be a huge step forward.

Unfortunately, major employers and industries have a huge vested interest in fighting against a guest worker program. It's highly common for agricultural producers, for instance, to pay half in advance, half on conclusion, then call ICE to round up the workers just before 'conclusion', getting their work done at half price with no legal recourse for the workers. The same thing happens in many other industries.

As with so many things in the world: it would be good for everyone (regardless of political leanings) who isn't well off, but bad for people who are very well off, and our system is hugely skewed toward those who are very well off getting what they want.

Replies:   jimq2  DBActive
jimq2 🚫

@Grey Wolf

A relatively pointless tautology. Every asylum seeker is legal, not illegal, and 95%+ of those who entered from 2021-2024 were asylum seekers. Very, very few 'illegals' crossed during that time.

A good part of that was Biden sending a message that the US would grant asylum to "worthy" immigrants. So we got Columbian and Venezuelan gangs seeking "asylum from oppression." Those that came in under asylum got access to things like; Housing assistance, Food allowance, Healthcare, and IRS issued ITIN's (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number because they didn't qualify for SS numbers.) so they could file tax returns and collect credits.

I also saw many who had an ITIN that wanted to use a voter registration card for ID to get a loan.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@jimq2

So we got Columbian and Venezuelan gangs seeking "asylum from oppression."

What we got were Columbians and Venezuelans who didn't want to be forced into gangs coming here to avoid becoming gang members. We just sent one of those people to El Salvador, even though he wasn't in a gang. I'm all for deporting gang members and criminals. The problem is, we're deporting anti-gang people with no criminal record and a record of contributing to America faster than we're deporting criminals.

Biden gets a tiny bit of the blame. The other party gets many times more blame. Biden never said 'the border is open', nor did he say 'come on down, you'll get in'. That was the other party.

And Biden repeatedly asked for more resources and more authority to limit asylum and quickly process claims. The other party repeatedly blocked him.

The reason they got access to all of those things is that it's illegal to deport an asylum seeker who doesn't violate US law without a proper hearing with full due process. We can't starve them out, either. They have to be provided for. Biden wanted to greatly increase staffing to provide those hearings - when he took office, we had asylum seekers from 2015 and before who were still waiting for their hearing and no resources to provide them. He was blocked repeatedly from doing so.

In short: create a crisis (both through action and inaction), then decry that crisis and run against it.

DBActive 🚫

@Grey Wolf

There is no way of knowing how many crimes are committed by illegals. Many, many jurisdictions refuse to question anyone concerning their status.

Yet we seem to track it pretty well in the case of culprits of violent crime. Interesting state of affairs.

No we don't. The laws in may places prohibit the police, courts and jails from asking about status. The status of the vast majority only becomes known when associates, family, (in violation of the law) a cop or correction officer tells ICE or the media gets involved. I know of numerous cases where offenders are released after detention hearings
by the state and city courts. These guys never show up after that.

Of course there is the fact that every illegal is illegal

A relatively pointless tautology. Every asylum seeker is legal, not illegal, and 95%+ of those who entered from 2021-2024 were asylum seekers. Very, very few 'illegals' crossed during that time.

During the period 2021-2024 there were (according to the Biden Administration) 2 million "known gotaways" who were never processed. That number of course doesn't count the unknown number of gotaways that were never seen crossing. The overwhelming majority of the people processed crossing the border were given, in violation of law, "humanitarian parole" with appearance dates two to three years out. The grant of parole is supposed to be done on a case-by-case basis under the law but Biden ignored that law and literally gave it to everyone who crossed.

In addition, almost all work in violation of the law

That is absolutely true, and we need (and have needed, for decades) reform of those laws, because without 'illegal' labor many things would collapse that people depend on.

And I agree about tax avoidance - another reason we need reform of those laws. The net tax impact of 'illegals' is enormously positive for America, though - they pay far more in taxes than they use in services. Ironically, regularizing their status in terms of a guest worker program or the like would likely diminish their positive effect on our tax system, but it still would be a huge step forward.

That's a myth. The millions of illegals consume massive services often working in cash businesses avoiding income taxes completely. Medical care, schooling, social benefit subsidies, increased policing requirement and the reduction in wages for legal citizens far outweigh the benefit of the taxes they pay. That does not even account for the fact that the income they receive is used to support criminal cartels or is sent out of the country for family remittances.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@DBActive

During the period 2021-2024 there were (according to the Biden Administration) 2 million "known gotaways" who were never processed.

Most of those 'known gotaways' were later encountered the same day, per CBP testimony. It's a 'known gotaway' if the first officer misses them.

The estimated illegal population of the US barely budged from 2021 to 2024, and remains over 2 million lower than it was in 2019.

That's a myth.

Funny. If it's a myth, it's a myth supported by extensive analysis from both left-leaning and right-leaning organizations over decades, and a myth with very little evidence that it is, in fact, a myth.

That does not even account for the fact that the income they receive is used to support criminal cartels or is sent out of the country for family remittances.

That has nothing to do with taxes. Income received, after taxes, is the recipient's to do with as they wish. It's a complete red herring, equivalent to saying 'Oh, but you bought a computer! That doesn't pay the government's bills!'

The millions of illegals consume massive services often working in cash businesses avoiding income taxes completely.

There are two problems with this. First, income taxes are - by far - the smallest part of taxes paid by people with lower-working-class incomes (which nearly every 'illegal' count as). Sales taxes, property taxes, and so forth are far higher.

Second, most 'illegals' work under an assumed SSN (so that employers can plausibly claim they 'checked citizenship'). Taxes are paid under that SSN, and that's it. No return, no refund, no credits, no nothing.

'Illegals' use very little medical care compared to citizens. Most (not all) of the schooling is for citizen children. Social benefit subsidies accessible to 'illegals' are very small. Since 'illegals' are, statistically (and ironically), far more law-abiding than citizens, that 'increased policing requirement' is nearly negligible. And there's very little evidence for 'reduction in wages for legal citizens'. In fact, there's a very strong argument that wages for legal citizens go up, on average, because most businesses that hire 'illegals' are nearly at their wage limit. If legal citizens had to do those jobs (and we need them done - there's no question about that), they would have to take those jobs and pass up even flipping burgers at McDonalds (which pays much better than most 'illegal' jobs).

Replies:   jimq2  DBActive
jimq2 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Second, most 'illegals' work under an assumed SSN (so that employers can plausibly claim they 'checked citizenship'). Taxes are paid under that SSN, and that's it. No return, no refund, no credits, no nothing.

Generally, no income taxes are withheld, just SS & Medicare. Then the person whose SS number it actually is gets a notice from IRS that he didn't include $XXXX on his Form 1040. That can hold up his refund for the months or even years that it takes for him to prove that he didn't work in Arizona and Florida at the same time. I know of a doctor in Phoenix that had an assessment of about $13,000 based on $47,000 of gross self-employment income from truck driving on top of the $170,000 income he had as a surgeon working at a Phoenix hospital. Plus they wanted late payment penalties.

My office used to handle 5 or 6 cases like that every year. Our services could cost the taxpayer anywhere from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand. So it is not a victimless crime to use a fake SS number. In the case of the doctor, it took over 18 months to resolve before he got his refund.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@jimq2

So it is not a victimless crime to use a fake SS number.

Oh, I'm absolutely not saying it's a victimless crime. It's absolutely a crime. No question about it.

But SS and Medicare make a lot of money overall on money paid in but never collected because of this. It sucks for the person victimized, but it's a significant revenue enhancement for those programs.

The problem with discussing this is often that it's possible to say 'The current system sucks, and it sucks in a lot of ways, but many of those ways aren't the ones that the rabble-rousers want to claim it sucks.' You don't have to defend the current system (which is abysmal) to also think it's crazy that people believe 'illegals' are revenue-negative to the US, that they 'depress wages', and so on and so forth.

We can do this better, but we're never going to do this better as long as 'illegals' are 'the enemy.' They're not. They're a net major positive for the US. They would be more of a positive if we fixed the system so they weren't illegal and lived within the system.

What worries me is that we're quite possibly going to decimate businesses across the US before people realize how much damage the 'illegals are the enemy' sentiment is enabling.

Replies:   Paladin_HGWT
Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Grey Wolf

The problem with discussing this is often that it's possible to say 'The current system sucks, and it sucks in a lot of ways, but many of those ways aren't the ones that the rabble-rousers want to claim it sucks.' You don't have to defend the current system (which is abysmal) to also think it's crazy that people believe 'illegals' are revenue-negative to the US, that they 'depress wages', and so on and so forth.

We can do this better...

Well said, even if we don't completely agree; we agree more about the important points than we disagree.

For the most part, states west of the Mississippi, are more effected by illegal immigration. Small rural communities are often most hurt by illegal immigrants. Reservations, in particular the Apache and Navajo (both have several Reservations) are particularly hurt, with damage to the ecology, and job opportunities for tribal members.

While I generally support Legal immigration, and offering Work Visas... I am concerned about the abuses by corporations such as Amazon and Microsoft.

Replies:   DBActive
DBActive 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

For the most part, states west of the Mississippi, are more effected by illegal immigration.

That's certainly not true in NJ where I live. There are about 500K illegals (very few are children) around 5% of the population.

Replies:   Paladin_HGWT
Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@DBActive

As I said in my post above. "For the most part." Because it is more common for illegal immigrants to settle in small rural (farming) communities; where there are more people like them (including citizens, legal residents, and illegals). Unfortunately, those communities lack the resources for people at need. Schools and medical care are underfunded for them. They are a disproportionate part of the communities.

On the Coasts, or big cities, such as Chicago, Minneapolis, Kansas City, or Atlanta, illegal immigrants are a smaller proportion, and those cities have more resources.

That is the basis of my generalization.

DBActive 🚫
Updated:

@Grey Wolf

Most of those 'known gotaways' were later encountered the same day, per CBP testimony. It's a 'known gotaway' if the first officer misses them.

No.

The official DHS definition:
Gotaway: A subject who, after making an illegal entry, is not turned back or apprehended and is no longer being actively pursued by Border Patrol agents;

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@DBActive

That's true, as far as it goes. But later testimony confirmed that most were apprehended further into the country.

The bottom line remains: the 'illegal' population of the US barely changed in those four years and remains much lower than in 2019. If it was millions of people leaving and balancing out those 'getaways,' then so be it. But CBP doesn't think it was.

And the diminished number is transparently obvious, at least where I live (in a border state, though nowhere particularly near the border). Businesses that had a vast pool of cheap and eager labor in the late 2010s have struggled mightily since 2020, and their struggles were no better in 2024 than they were in 2021. That cheap and eager labor force had turned into a 15-20% smaller, more expensive labor force, forcing prices higher and closing businesses.

And, again - not defending the current system. It sucks. But the solution is a well-designed guest worker system, not pretending that we don't need guest workers. The current system seems nearly designed to maximize bad behavior all the way around.

Replies:   DBActive
DBActive 🚫

@Grey Wolf

The illegal population increased from around 11.1 million in 2019 to 13.7 million by the end of 2023.

writernumber7 🚫

@GreyWolf

The vast majority of your post is pure rationalization to avoid an uncomfortable fact, which is endemic among left leaning voters.

That illegals were captured, released without a court date, and / or deported and allowed to walk back in to have committed rage and murder is an indictment of the government that allow it.

Replies:   Grey Wolf  Gauthier
Grey Wolf 🚫

@writernumber7

Which 'illegals' are you referring to? There are sporadic cases of 'illegals' being released under both Republican and Democratic administrations in many states, and some of them have gone on to offend, but there are far more citizens who were 'captured, released without a court date, and [] committed rage[sic] and murder.'

So, you're indicting both Republican and Democratic governments indiscriminately. Got it.

What were they 'captured' for? Are these 'illegals' or asylum seekers (who are not 'illegals' by definition)? And so on, and so forth.

You're looking at a tiny molehill and declaring it to be Mount Everest. It's not, and the vast majority of your post is pure rationalization to avoid that uncomfortable fact.

Gauthier 🚫

@writernumber7

@Lazeez
Ban that fucking bot I'm sick of his repeated lies and Xenophobia.

solreader50 🚫

@writernumber7

Just ask the families of American women raped and murdered by illegal aliens here

Not sure about the USA but here in Germany where I now live, the number of German women raped and murdered by illegal immigrants pales in comparison to the number raped and murdered by male Germans.

In 2024 we had one femicide (a woman killed by her partner or ex-partner) per day. The problem is not illegal immigrants. It is a sub-set of men.

Replies:   Lumpy
Lumpy 🚫

@solreader50

IT's true here too. The vast majority are done by citizens. Sometimes prominent citizens people like writernumber7 probably supports, blaming the women for it.

bandeau_rouge 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

THen explain the following

1. if all of the "wonderful muslims fleeding Sharia law" came to England/UK for the reason to ESCAPE sharia law,,,

why did they demand the right to IMPOSE SHARIA law on themselves once they were established in the UK?

2. Why are the muslims allwoed to have their own sharia court system operating in your country. seriously, why?

3. why are these good muslims (gag) being allowed to circumvent standard ancient british legal doctrine by claiming "buts its allowed under sharia law"

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫
Updated:

@bandeau_rouge

THen explain the following
1. if all of the "wonderful muslims fleeding Sharia law" came to England/UK for the reason to ESCAPE sharia law,,,

First, I don't know what the word "Fleeding" means. I assume it's a typo made because you're typing quickly due to your underlying anger. So, I'm going to assume you mean "Fleeing"

According to the latest Census data for England and Wales (2021), conducted by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) 51.3% of the Muslim population reported that they were born in the UK. This equates to just over 2 million people out of the total 3.9 million people who identified as Muslim in England and Wales during that census.

So, first of all, the majority of Muslims in Britain were born here. They are as British as I am. As British as any Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Shik, Hindu, Buddhist or Atheist born here.

Of the ones not born here, Looking at the 2021 Census data for England and Wales again: There were approximately 1.9 million Muslims living in England and Wales who were born outside the UK. The ONS reported that 14.0% of non-UK-born Muslims arrived between March 2011 and March 2021 (the decade leading up to the census). Calculating this percentage based on the non-UK-born Muslim population (around 1.87 million according to detailed tables) gives approximately 262,000 people.

So to be clear, that's around 26,000 per year. That is not an exodus. We are not being invaded. There is no "Fleeding" from Sharia Law.

why did they demand the right to IMPOSE SHARIA law on themselves once they were established in the UK?
2. Why are the muslims allwoed to have their own sharia court system operating in your country. seriously, why?
3. why are these good muslims (gag) being allowed to circumvent standard ancient british legal doctrine by claiming "buts its allowed under sharia law"

First of all, UK Law is Supreme: The fundamental point is that Sharia law is not part of the official legal system of the United Kingdom (which includes England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland). The only law recognised and enforced by the state courts and authorities is UK law, derived from Acts of Parliament and court judgments (common law/case law). There is no parallel Sharia legal system operating with state-sanctioned authority in the UK. All residents of the UK are subject to UK law, regardless of their religion.

That is a statement of FACT. It cannot be disputed.

Now, there are bodies often referred to as "Sharia councils" or "Muslim Arbitration Tribunals" operating in the UK. These bodies primarily offer services within some Muslim communities related to religious aspects of family matters (like issuing an Islamic divorce - talaq), mediation in disputes, and advice based on Islamic principles.

Their role is largely voluntary. People choose to approach them for guidance or resolution consistent with their faith. Crucially, these councils have no legal power to enforce rulings that contradict UK law. They cannot grant a civil divorce (which is required to legally end a marriage under UK law), rule on child custody matters contrary to UK court orders, handle criminal cases, or make decisions that violate UK legislation (such as equality laws).

In some instances, parties can agree to resolve civil disputes (like commercial or some family financial matters) through arbitration, potentially using principles agreed upon by the parties (which could be Sharia-based). This is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996. However, any arbitration award must be compatible with UK public policy and law, and can be challenged in the UK courts if it is deemed unfair or legally flawed.

An Islamic marriage ceremony (nikah) is important within the Muslim faith but, on its own, is generally not recognised as a legal marriage under UK law unless it takes place in a registered building and meets the specific civil requirements for marriage registration in the UK. This is exactly the same as any other religious marriage, including Christian marriage, in the UK. If you get married in a church, you still have to sign the documents to make the marrige legal - if you don't do that, it's not a legal marriage.

The UK does have a well-developed Islamic finance sector. This operates within the UK's regulatory framework, with specific structures approved by UK regulators to allow financial products (like mortgages or bonds) to comply with Sharia principles (e.g., the prohibition of interest). This is an example of UK law accommodating specific religious practices within its own structure, not an application of Sharia law itself.

In summary, Sharia law has no formal legal status in the UK. UK law is paramount. Sharia principles function primarily as a personal code of conduct for Muslims and through voluntary advisory, mediation, or limited arbitration services offered by Sharia councils. These services operate entirely subordinate to UK law and cannot override the legal rights and obligations applicable to all UK residents.

Again, to reiterate the point, UK Law is Supreme.

Now, several other religions in the UK have bodies or processes that function in ways analogous to Sharia councils, primarily for applying their own religious laws and traditions to internal matters, particularly concerning family life and dispute resolution, such as the Jewish Beth Din or the Catholic or Church of England Ecclesiastical Tribunals. Why have you not asked the same question of those "courts" I wonder?

But, and this is important, all religions "courts" operating in the UK are subordinate to UK law. They cannot replace required civil procedures (like legal marriage registration or civil divorce), make legally binding rulings that contradict UK law (e.g., regarding child welfare or criminal matters), or enforce decisions except through voluntary agreement or, in limited civil cases, via the Arbitration Act 1996, which itself is subject to oversight by UK courts.

So to answer your questions 2 & 3 directly - This is not allowed. It's just not.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

A couple of links for you if you are interested.

https://www.roythorne.co.uk/site/blog/family-law-blog/an-overview-of-sharia-law - That's from a leading UK Law Firm

https://fullfact.org/law/uks-sharia-courts/ - that's a UK based Fact Checking service.

Gauthier 🚫

@writernumber7

that is how you 'investigate' written comments?

If you take time to search for the incriminating WhatsApp messages you can find some of them. Clearly, they are complete nutjob peddling harmful conspiracy theories. Just like you...

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Gauthier

If you take time to search for the incriminating WhatsApp messages you can find some of them

Just out of interest, I don't suppose you have a link? I'd be interested in reading some of these messages, and don't really have the time to search for them until I get home later tonight. I wouldn't want to assume what they are like (although, having seen some of the messages my wife (a teacher) gets from parents, I can take a guess)

writernumber7 🚫

@Gauthier

Your hostility to any challenge to your religion of politics doesn't help your cause, only gives me a chuckle.

solreader50 🚫

@writernumber7

In Scotland we have a word for your message - drivel. It is sad that the state of education in your country is so low that you even put this in writing. Unless you meant it as fiction. Which it certainly is.

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@solreader50

What is sad is the number of people watching their country implode because 'it didn't happen if I didn't see it…'

I guess the british empire never disappeared either because you weren't present at the moment..

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  garymrssn
Marc Nobbs 🚫
Updated:

@writernumber7

What is sad is the number of people watching their country implode because 'it didn't happen if I didn't see it…'

It's not that "we didn't see it." It's more that the vast majority see the opposite of what you claim every single day as they go about their daily lives.

My neighbours are from India. They are lovely people. We stood in their garden and let off fireworks for Diwali, and they did the same in our garden for Guy Fawkes night. My wife is teaching their daughter the piano and French. That's the reality of multi-cultural Britain and it's a brilliant, beautiful thing.

My daughter's school (where my wife also teaches) had an Iftar event after school last week. It's an all-girls school and *very* multicultural. Everyone was invited to Iftar not just those observing Ramadan and, again, it was a beautiful sight to see people of all faiths and races getting together to celebrate. Just like it was beautiful to see people of all faiths at the Christmas concert in December.

Britain at its best is a melting pot of all races, faiths and backgrounds.

My football club, Wolverhampton Wanderers, has one of the most diverse fan bases in the country. It's magnificent. We again see people of all faiths gathering at the Molineux to follow our team. There's one supporter in particular who has become quite famous because he is very distinctive - he always wears a turban that matches whatever shade of Old Gold our shirts are this year. He's very particular about making sure it matches. And twice a year, he and his family do "Samosa Saturday" where they sell homemade samosas before the match to raise money for a dementia charity. Last year he even walked from the Molineux in Wolverhampton to St James Park in Newcastle for the away game there to raise money.

Tell me that's not amazing in every sense of the word.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckrxv77gky5o

During the Farage Riots last summer, where the lies and misinformation spread by a right-wing grifter caused thugs to go out on the streets and "protest" immigration by smashing up their own towns. But in several towns, such as Northampton, the people in the local community, from all races and faiths, came out on the streets to hold a "counter protest" - a demonstration of love and community cohesion that prevented any violence.

Again, it was beautiful to see people singing and dancing together and just enjoying being part of that great, big melting pot that is their town.

https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2024-08-08/hundreds-unite-against-racism-amid-dancing-and-chanting-on-the-streets

This country is not imploding. This country is generally united against the thugs and grifters that would put us down for their own gain. That has always been Britain's greatest strength. And it always will be. And I, for one, am proud of it.

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

For all that you see that is right and beautiful, ignoring the creeping socialism and it's inevitable decent into totalitarianism will land you rehire six police in riot gear show up at a house to 'investigate' unsupportive commentary on social media and the clown car police administration will lie out this asses claiming they 'had' to arrest the couple to properly investigate their opinions.
Say what you want, but england is headed down a dark road, if you don't believe me, look at the conditions in San Francisco brought on by people standing quietly while the progressive (regressive) totalitarian left destroyed the city. And how about the torching of Tesla dealerships because someone told the leftist horde to hate Elon Musk and that descended into violence, arson and extraordinary examples of hate.

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@writernumber7

As always, someone no one here has ever heard from before, and has NEVER contributed to SOL in ANY way, is suddenly spouting nonsense. As always there are Trolls, who simply seek to disrupt others by spreading disruptions, not caring about the very position they typically extol.

In short, it's best to NOT feed those trolls, but to ignore them, starving them of attention so they'll head somewhere else where they can more easily disrupt others.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  julka
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

In short, it's best to NOT feed those trolls, but to ignore them, starving them of attention so they'll head somewhere else where they can more easily disrupt others.

Sadly, I suspect you are very much correct.

julka 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

In short, it's best to NOT feed those trolls, but to ignore them, starving them of attention so they'll head somewhere else where they can more easily disrupt others.

I agree that ignoring the troll is the ideal solution - it's a hard one to put into practice, though. In an environment like SOL, where a lot of participants are free speech absolutists (and I need to stress that in this post I am not making a judgement, simply an observation), I suspect (and you can correct me if you disagree) that people would find issue with banning the poster and deleting his threads; it would look too similar to censorship, and I suspect (again, correct me if you disagree) that people would argue that the regulars here should debate the merits of the posts. And we see that debate happening here, but it's not actually a debate because the original poster doesn't care; anything that somebody refutes, he (and i have full confidence fhe original poster is a he) simply invents some new statistic that is equally garbage but now somebody else has to go and spend the time to look up actual numbers to correct him. There are no positions he can be convinced on because he doesn't have a position at all.

The forum as a whole could ignore him, but now you have threads with bizarre right-wing garbage being thrown into the mix that people have to pick through in order to find the actual conversations; there's no contribution, he's just making it worse for everybody by passively posting.

So the way to starve the troll, in my opinion, is to just admit off the bat, "this is not somebody who is here to engage in good faith" and ban them immediately. When somebody complains that this is a violation of free speech, tell them that this isn't a government and moderation is a moral service to the community.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

Honestly, how did you expect the police to investigate without questioning the couple?

And if the couple refuse to speak to the police, that's going to lead to arrest. From the information we have, this is a very middle class couple. Maybe even "Upper Middle Class" if you like. It's extremely likely that they got "upset" when the police arrived to question them. It wouldn't surprise me they were abusive towards the police given what they have been accused of (ie abuse and harassment). If you do that you're going to get arrested, but this couple probably thought that people "like them" don't get arrested.

The problem with type of story is that had the police not investigated, then the newspaper headline (in the same bloody papers) would be how police don't care about abuse towards school staff, and people like you would be screaming about how Britain is a lawless wasteland.

They litterally can't win no matter what they do.

And then there's the whole "Muslim invasion" you keep going on about. Nothing in this story is about Muslims. Nothing. Not a thing. The fact you brought that up speaks volumes about who you are.

garymrssn 🚫

@writernumber7

What is sad is the number of people watching their country implode because 'it didn't happen if I didn't see it…'

What is really sad is the number of people who didn't see it because they made a conscious effort not to look.

jimq2 🚫

@writernumber7

Only comment I have is that the American media is generally not right leaning. It is mostly liberal.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫
Updated:

@jimq2

I'm always fascinated by the use of the word "liberal", in particular its use as a pejorative (I'm not saying that's how you've used it here, but it's how lots of people do use it).

some of the accepted definitions of "liberal"

Openness and Tolerance: Willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open-minded.

Favoring Reform and Progress: Supporting gradual political and social reform; favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform (this leans towards classical liberalism).

Generosity: Given, used, or occurring in generous amounts (e.g., a liberal helping of sauce).

Broad-minded Education: Relating to arts subjects (like literature and history) intended to provide general knowledge rather than technical skills (e.g., liberal arts education).

Are any of those really "bad" things? I'd argue not.

Since "liberalism" is mentioned above, let's look at it's definition too.

Classical Liberalism: Historically, it emphasized individual rights (life, liberty, property), limited government intervention in the economy (laissez-faire), free markets, constitutionalism, rule of law, and consent of the governed.

Modern/Social Liberalism (especially in the US): In contemporary American usage, "liberal" typically refers to the centre-left. It still values individual rights but also emphasizes social justice, equality of opportunity, and the belief that government should intervene to address social inequalities, provide a social safety net (welfare, healthcare), regulate the economy to protect the environment and workers, and expand civil rights.

Modern Liberalism (Europe/Elsewhere): In many other parts of the world, "liberal" parties might be centrist or even centre-right, often focusing more on economic liberalism (free markets, lower taxes) combined with social progressiveness or tolerance. The strong association with the "left" is less pronounced than in the US.

Again, despite the differences in definition on the two sides of the Atlantic, I dont' see any of those as "bad".

Looking at "Classical Liberalism" we get 5 core principles

Liberty: The fundamental importance of individual freedom. This includes freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, and the right to own property.

Consent of the Governed: The idea that governments derive their legitimacy from the agreement of the people they rule, typically expressed through democratic elections.

Equality: Belief in equality before the law and often, equality of opportunity. How this equality is best achieved is a major point of divergence within liberalism.

Individual Rights: Emphasis on protecting the inherent rights of individuals, often enshrined in constitutions or bills of rights.

Rule of Law: The principle that everyone, including the government, is subject to the law.

Again, I don't see anything there to be afraid of. Being "liberal" isn't a bad thing, IMHO.

Sorry, I've been reading a book about the history of liberalism recently and this peaked my interest. I've just finished the chapter on John Stuart Mill, so getting closer to modern thinking on the topic. It's fascinating.

Replies:   jimq2  writernumber7
jimq2 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Maybe I should have used the term left-leaning instead of liberal. The current American media mainly supports the Democrat party.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@jimq2

The current American media mainly supports the Democrat party.

Is that true?

I suppose on the Dem side you'd have CNN & MSNBC, but on the other side you've got Fox News, Newsmax, OAN. Seems pretty even split to me, but I guess it depends on ratings.

Is this the equivalent of people saying the British media is left-wing when the two biggest-selling newspapers are The Sun and The Daily Mail?

And isn't it correct that most "talk radio" stations lean to the right (simply because that gets people to call in more easily)? I don't know if that is true or not.

Also, by European standards, the Democrats aren't particularly "left-leaning." If anything, they'd be more "centre-right."

Dominions Son 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Also, by European standards, the Democrats aren't particularly "left-leaning." If anything, they'd be more "centre-right."

Which should not be applied to the US, just as those of us in the US should not apply US standards for left/right to Europe.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Dominions Son

Very true, but it's a point worth making nonetheless, don't you think?

Given this thread began with accusations against my country based very much on the OP's own perspective, it's certainly worth pointing out the difference between our countries that already exists.

awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

the two biggest-selling newspapers are The Sun

The Sun supported Labour in the last election.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  solreader50
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Because Murdoch saw the writing on the wall for Sunak and Co. and hates being seen backing a loser.

That's why he backed Blair as wellβ€”until Cameron came along.

And let's be honest, it wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement of Starmer, was it?

To even suggest The Sun is anything other than Right-Wing is disingenuous at best.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

To even suggest The Sun is anything other than Right-Wing is disingenuous at best.

I that case I'm disingenuous because, IMO,while it does take great glee in exposing the current government's shortcomings, it persists in giving it the benefit of the doubt.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

I think you are being disingenuous and deliberately so.

You are intelligent enough to know that what makes a newspaper right-wing isn't just whether they attack a Labour government or support a Tory one. It's about the articles they choose to publish, the general tone of them as well as the choice of subject matter. It's about the spin the put on any given story (not just obviously political ones). It's about the columnists they employ to write opinion pieces.
The Sun is a right wing newspaper. It always has been. It was when I used to borrow the copy my dad bought every day to check out page 3 and it remains so to this day.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

It always has been.

I disagree with that. Historically it was a left-wing paper. I remember people at work borrowing my copy to get the left-wing perspective on current affairs. And look at Page 3, of course

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Historically it was a left-wing paper.

Murdoch bought it in 69. Page three was introduced in 70. By 74 the paper was supporting the Tories and it was firmly behind Thatcher when she came to power in 79.

Other than that brief period it "supported" Blair it's been right wing, and arguably even during the Blair years it leaned to the right.

The political stance of The Sun over my entire lifetime is so unquestionably self evident that I can't actually belive we're having this conversation.

solreader50 🚫
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

The Sun supported Labour in the last election.

As did many current and ex members of the Conservative Party. It wasn't difficult. Given an incompetent government and Prime Minister even a wilting lettuce looks good and that is what Britain voted for.

It is one of the genuine sorrows of my declining years to watch those great nations and one-time allies, the United Stats and the United Kingdom having to successively choose between such awful candidates in election after election.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@solreader50

It is one of the genuine sorrows of my declining years to watch those great nations and one-time allies, the United Stats and the United Kingdom having to successively choose between such awful candidates in election after election.

2019. Oh my days what a grim election that was.

At least last year the choice was between obvious incompetence and perceived competence. Not the most inspiring choice, I admit, but still.

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

I suppose on the Dem side you'd have CNN & MSNBC, but on the other side you've got Fox News, Newsmax, OAN.

You forgot to mention ABC, CBS, NBC, TBS, PBS, and NPR, as well as the vast majority of print media. Only on AM radio is there a significant conservative presence.

Journalists in the USA self report being nearly 90% Leftists. The remaining 10% are the centrists and conservatives. Similar numbers for Political contributions.

Canada and Europe are even more lopsided.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Grey Wolf
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

You forgot to mention ABC, CBS, NBC, TBS, PBS, and NPR, as well as the vast majority of print media.

Well, my perspective is from the UK. CNN and MSNBC are broadcast here. Fox News was, but it isn't anymore (sorry, I can't remember when it stopped). I only know about the other two I mentioned because of reporting around Trump.

None of the other networks are broadcast here, so I wouldn't assume anything about them. Similarly, the print media is not available in my part of the UK (I think you might be able to pick up some of them in London), and I don't visit their websites (why would I? It's not relevant to me), so, again, I wouldn't make assumptions.

Canada and Europe are even more lopsided.

I can't speak about Canada or the rest of Europe, but there's a perception amongst those on the right that British media has a left-wing bias, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Most newspapers have a right-wing slant that comes directly from their owners. On the right, you'd have The Sun, The Mail, The Times, The Telegraph, The Express and arguably The Star (although that's less a newspaper and more a comic). On the left, there's The Mirror and The Guardian, both of which sell far fewer copies than the others.

Broadcast media is different because it's regulated and required by law to remain neutral. (I think the correct phrase is "Provide Balance") We don't have a Fox News equivalent - Well, we have GB News, which keeps getting fined by the regulator and is losing a ton of money, but that's a recent development.

The big playersβ€”the BBC, ITV, and Sky Newsβ€”do offer reasonable balance. It's not perfect, but it's reasonable. Of course, the Left accuses them of right-wing bias, and the right accuses them of left-wing bias, which probably means they are getting it about right.

If you're interested in the effect the right-wing press has had on the UK, James O'Brien covers it extensively in the opening three chapters of his book "How They Broke Britain", which cover Rupert Murdoch, Paul Dacre, and Andrew Neil. It's well worth a read/listen.

Replies:   solreader50
solreader50 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

but there's a perception amongst those on the right that British media has a left-wing bias, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Surely this is matched by a perception amongst those on the left that British media has a right-wing bias - which, with one or two exceptions, it certainly does.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

ABC, CBS, and NBC are extremely corporatist. They're hardly 'leftist' at all.

One part of the problem is that 'media bias' is often claimed on the basis of things like 'Well, the media is >50% anti-Y stories. If they were fair, half of the stories would be pro-Y!' Suppose Y was 'cancer'. Would you expect the media to run 50% 'Cancer is great! We need more of it!' stories?

Look at the coverage from 2021-2024 and how often the 'mainstream media' played into the 'everything is bad' narrative, when - objectively - things were actually fairly good. If the media of 1981-1984 had covered Reagan the way the media of 2021-2024 covered Biden, and if there had been an equally strong 'liberal media' then to the 'conservative media' of today, the landslide winner in 1984 would've been Mondale.

Part of the problem is using 'leftist' vs 'conservative'. Real 'leftists' have very little place in US media. Real 'conservatives' have very little place, either. There is a 'Democratic' media presence, but the parties are now very poorly aligned with what constituted 'liberal' and 'conservative' just a few decades ago, and Democrats (in the media and just in person) tend to be their own worst critics in many ways.

Fox News, OANN, Newsmax, etc are very 'Republican', but the Republican party of the past decade has nearly nothing to do with 'conservatives'. It's not 'conservative' to tear down the US military, attack our allies, try to undo NATO, cozy up to dictatorships, run enormous deficits, and so forth. Reagan et al would be utterly appalled at what the Republican party has come to.

Which is a lot of the problem. If you're a centrist or center-right, the Republican party has absolutely no use for you, and you'll be called a 'lib' and mocked. That's not a hypothetical - I personally know dozens of people who are 80's/90's/00's conservatives who have, point blank, been told they are 'libs' and are not welcome in the Republican party. By current US 'Republican' standards, Ronald Reagan was a flaming 'lib', after all.

Replies:   Paladin_HGWT
Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Grey Wolf

not welcome in the Republican party.

I fear that may be true where you are.

Where I live, eastern King County (near Seattle), it is a very "open tent" GOP. When less than 30% of the voters are GOP (less than 10% in Seattle) folks are a lot more tolerant.

I am typically considered "far" Right here on SoL. When I was down in Mississippi, I was considered to be "Extremely" Leftist, practically a "Gawddammed Canadian!" and that was by the Democrats down there! πŸ˜†

While I do believe there are Leftists on ABC, CBS, NBC, aka "mainstream media" I concede that, in many cases, many are more Democrats, than Leftists.

Local media, and the West Coast in particular, informs my opinions about media personalities. Mostly I follow local, and West Coast news, because it is what most effects me.

For military/naval, and international matters, I follow other sources. "Mainstream media" is less than useless for such matters!

solreader50 🚫

@jimq2

Maybe I should have used the term left-leaning instead of liberal. The current American media mainly supports the Democrat party.

Well good journalism is an intellectual, investigative pursuit. And it is hard to believe that any person with those qualities could support the Republicans in their current form. Indeed, I just scoured the recent headlines from respected conservative thinker and journalist George Will and they are all critical of the Republicans without being supportive of the Democrats.

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@jimq2

Sorry, but which world do you live on? Or, which drugs are you on, as I'll need try a few. But HOW can you possibly describe the 'current American media' as anything other than rabidly anti-liberal and anti-democratic?

That's typically the line quoted by the ultra-conservatives, who denounce the media for NOT espousing their reactionary, extremest views. Again, that's the entire basis of the 2025 project, to target both the 'free-press' and the government for the express purpose of undermining both.

So, for those who see 'objective' opinions as objectionable, offensive and radical, yeah, I'm not buying it, as obviously, they'll buy anything that agrees with THEIR personal opinions.

Again, intellectuals doubt the limits of their knowledge, as it's a way of reevaluating their opinions to be sure they still hold true, while fools never doubt their unquestioned opinions.

No offense, but your comment is already an outdated concept, as any claim to American exceptionalism or American objectivity is now history, as given the current environment, the 'liberal' democrats are too terrified to do a thing to provide ANY alternative to it.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

Again, intellectuals doubt the limits of their knowledge, as it's a way of reevaluating their opinions to be sure they still hold true, while fools never doubt their unquestioned opinions.

Completely agree. As I said elsewhere, doubt is the hallmark of intelligence. It's doubt that leads to questioning oneself which in turn leads to innovation and progress.

I've mentioned elsewhere I've been reading a book on the history of liberalism, going all the way back to it's earliest origins with Descartes. It's fascinating and "doubt" plays a huge part in the progress of the ideas that led to what became liberalism.

writernumber7 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

The current American media to which you refer is out of date, out of touch, out of ideas and out of their minds.

The upstart, citizen journalists have outed the main stream media to such an extent that they have become laughingstocks to most of the public. When President Trump would deride them as fake news, they deserved it and then tried projecting that onto media that did not toe the left wing line.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@writernumber7

The upstart, citizen journalists

And the upstart, citizen journalists have become laughingstocks to anyone who actually understands facts, logic, proof, causation, and accuracy.

The epitome of 'fake news' in the US is right-leaning news.

Lumpy 🚫

@jimq2

Although, you should consider that the US Democrate party would be considered a right leaning party in almost every other country.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@jimq2

Political parties are a very poor substitute for 'liberal' and 'conservative' in terms of American politics. The shift in US political parties has been dramatic over the last four decades. Someone like Reagan, Bush Sr., Ford, Eisenhower, and even Nixon would have no place whatsoever in the current Republican party, nor would most 'conservative stalwarts' prior to 2000. If you're a Reagan conservative working in the media, you would most likely support the Democratic party. If you're an Eisenhower conservative, you would support the Democratic party. Heck, if you were a George W. Bush conservative, you might well still support the Democratic party.

That doesn't mean they're 'left-leaning', unless you consider Reagan, Bush Sr, Eisenhower, et al to be 'left-leaning'. It's just that center-right-leaning people have nowhere to go in the Republican party. There's no room for them there other than as punching bags.

writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

The modern leftist has zero relationship to what you are referring… none.

The modern liberal is all in on censorship, approved speech, rule through fear, forced compliance, and above all, ignorance of their behavior with a HUGe helping of projection added in.

The modern liberal does exactly everything they accuse conservatives of, and more.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  GreyWolf
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

That may be your experience but it's not mine. Not by a very, very long way.

Perhaps you need to reevaluate the people you spend time with.

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Crazy as it sounds, I was thinking the exact same thing about you and your enemies list.

GreyWolf 🚫

@writernumber7

The modern liberal is all in on censorship, approved speech, rule through fear, forced compliance, and above all, ignorance of their behavior with a HUGe helping of projection added in.

Ah, so the current government of the United States is composed entirely of 'modern liberals', then. Because that is a completely accurate description of the government we've had since January 2025.

Nice to know that the Republican Party is now the party of 'modern liberals'. They certainly aren't, in any way, 'conservative,' and haven't been for at least a decade.

Gauthier 🚫

@writernumber7

writernumber7

I think the forum is infected by a grok or chatgpt russian bot.
No person alive could write such insane fake drivel.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Gauthier

Both Grok and ChatGPT would make more sense, TBF

awnlee jawking 🚫
Updated:

@Gauthier

In his defence, the UK is becoming more and more asymmetric. The Sentencing Council tried to impose guidelines that discriminated against white males, and now police are being told to take into account the ethnicity and culture of suspects.

Added to historical discrimination against white males in schools, in the police force, in the military and elsewhere under the misguided policy of positive discrimination, there's quite of lot of evidence that equality and 'colourblind' are going down the toilet.

The government has set up a review of Islamophobia, and one of its first recommendations, likely to make it into law, is to make it illegal to photograph a muslim woman not wearing a hajib without her permission.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Added to historical discrimination against white males in schools,

Well, as a 50yo white male with a 19yo white male son, I can honestly say I've never felt discriminated against either at school (long time ago, I admit) or professionally. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I don't feel my son was ever discriminated against during the past 13 years either. Well, maybe that one time after the Brexit result when someone in his class told him to bugger off back to France (he's a dual national, my wife is French).

Maybe we've both just been very, very lucky, or maybe the idea that White Males are discriminated against is one of the biggest myths peddled by online "influencers" like a certain Mr Tate. I really wouldn't want to say which is the more likely.

Studies have shown that "Working Class White Males" do tend to do worse at school, but I'm going to go ahead and surmise that it's more to do with the "working class" part of that description than the "white male" part. (That's me speaking as someone from a very working class background) I mean, the same doesn't apply to "Middle Class White Males" so...

awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

One theory I've seen is that the reason white, working-class males underperform in the education system is due to the predominance of women teachers leaving them without strong role models.

Culture may play a part too because there's no such issue with non-white working-class boys.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Grey Wolf  Marius-6
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

predominance of women teachers leaving them without strong role models.

This I agree with. Working class boys (of any race) are also more likely to come from single parent homes, I believe. They are less likely to have books readily available at home or space at home to study adequately. This is a far bigger issue than their skin colour.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@awnlee jawking

One theory I've seen is that the reason white, working-class males underperform in the education system is due to the predominance of women teachers leaving them without strong role models.

Eh. It's possible, but I think there are easier answers. The education system has always been female-dominated in many places.

One easier answer - one I've seen a fair number of stories on - is that the education system sucks for boys at young ages because it places a very high emphasis on 'sit down, shut up, and do your work,' something boys are simply not designed to do at young ages. Combine that with the precipitous drop in 'recess' and P.E. (wouldn't want anyone getting hurt! too hard to supervise mobs of kids playing!) and boys become categorized as having 'behavior problems' when they're just full of energy (which they should be).

The problem isn't a lack of role models, the problem is that we're putting male elementary-aged children into a straightjacket and applying long-term consequences to them when they fight it.

I went to elementary school decades ago. Not a single male role model in sight at school. Female teachers, female principals. The only males around were janitors. No problems, and males didn't underperform. Before you ask, no, most of my peers were probably above 'working class'. But the same was true at working class schools.

The difference was that we had recess and PE and weren't expected to sit quietly for nearly the entire day without a break.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Do American working-class boys underperform in the US? Has it always been that way or has there been a slow decline, like in the UK?

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Grey Wolf
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Has the decline been slow? Or just under-reported until the last few years?

I started Secondary school in 1986. It was in a very working-class area, covering three council estates. Less than half of my year stayed at sixth form after GCSEs, and certainly more girls stayed on than boys. And there were fewer boys (myself included) who then went on to university than girls did.

And when I got to university, I didn't encounter very many working-class lads like me.

Totally anecdotal, but I suspect that working-class boys have been underperforming for a lot longer than has been reported.

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

In the US, the 1980s are probably when the balance started to flip. By 1995, the percentage of men and women who had a bachelor's degree was the same. Today, it's much higher for women. That's irrespective of class, though.

On the other hand, overall educational achievement has gone sharply upward for both. In 1995, it was 25% of men, 25% of women with a degree. Now, it's 37% of men, 47% of women.

That might make the case that both genders have been 'overperforming,' but that women have been more overperforming.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Boys in general underperform in the US, and working-class boys underperform more than privileged boys. But, top to bottom, boys underperform girls in the school system, by and large. There are exceptions.

As noted in what I wrote, this is fairly new. Boys didn't underperform decades ago. They may well have overperformed, because the expectation of the educational system was that girls' highest aspirations in terms of employment should be 'teacher' or 'principal,' not 'engineer,' 'doctor,' 'lawyer,' 'businesswoman,' and so forth.

But an awful lot of the downfall of boys tracks with the increased emphasis on behaviors and skills that statistically are very hard for younger males than they are for younger females. Prioritize good handwriting, linguistic ability, keeping quiet, sitting and not fidgeting, and so forth, and you advantage girls who are simply better at those things developmentally. Boys develop fine motor skills later than girls, develop linguistic skills later than girls, and are more prone to wanting to run around and go crazy.

And we've drastically reduced free time, play time, recess, and so forth over that time, both because they're 'wasteful' and because American society has become extremely risk-averse with respect to children.

This isn't a secret agenda and no one is doing anything nefarious. There are reasons why these things have been prioritized, and I don't think anyone ever intended them to disadvantage males. But males have unquestionably been disadvantaged.

Those with more parental resources do better. That's also always been the case, but it's probably a wider gap now.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Those with more parental resources do better.

That's not necessarily true in the UK. Working-class boys with parents of South or East Asian heritage actually outperform, and working-class boys with parents of black heritage don't underperform to the extent of their white peers.

As prominent politician Sajid Javid frequently said, he's the son of a bus driver.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Working-class boys with parents of South or East Asian heritage actually outperform, and working-class boys with parents of black heritage don't underperform to the extent of their white peers.

I believe this is down to parental influence to a large extent. The South and East Asian cultures still place a high value on education, far higher than White Working-Class parents, who are frequently the ones who will tell their kids something along the lines of "I never did well at school, and I didn't do badly" or something similar.

Of course, what they miss is they even if, in their own terms, they "didn't do badly", they likely would have done even better had they done better at school or even gone to university.

Black backgrounds are different in that they are treated as a whole statistically, but quite often, different heritages will perform differently. Those with a Nigerian background, for example, tend to do better than some other African backgrounds - again, that's down to parental influence much of the time.

Marius-6 🚫
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

One theory I've seen is that the reason white, working-class males underperform in the education system is due to the predominance of women teachers leaving them without strong role models.

Culture may play a part too because there's no such issue with non-white working-class boys.

I guess You are comparatively "lucky" across the pond...

In the USA Black males are dropping out of school at a rate exceeding 33%. Another 33% of Black Males are functionally illiterate! Many are effectively innumerate too!

Just to the south of me, in Oregon, the State Legislature changed the laws, so that it is no longer a requirement to be able to rear, nor pass arithmetic, to receive a high school diploma.

Some fast food places have cash registers that use pictographs! Not to mention that too often the employees cannot (or choose not) speak English.

Listening to young Black Males speak in public, I despair for the future!

I remember being urged to Excell in high school. That the KKK and other organizations wished to keep minorities ignorant!

The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr, and Malcom X agreed that we Needed to Educate ourselves; including getting good grades in school.

Now there are separate graduations, separate dorms, etc!

Replies:   Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf 🚫

@Marius-6

Please take 'functional literacy' numbers with a grain of salt roughly the size of the Rock of Gibraltar. Most of them are ridiculously high and have been put out there by organizations with a financial stake in overreporting the number.

The drop-out rate you're using is also ridiculously high. The black male dropout rate in the US is about 8%. Another 8% or so fail to complete school because they were suspended, expelled, or imprisoned, but many in that subset go on to complete their GED. It's nowhere near 33%.

Mind you: this is not an 'all is well' comment. The actual numbers still suck. But giving numbers that are 2-3x (or more) higher than reality doesn't really help, either.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@Grey Wolf

And then there are the schools that have "dropped out" by not doing a good job teaching. Recently read of a case of a girl suing her HS administration because even though she graduated in the top 20% of her class, she could not read well enough to comprehend college textbooks.

Replies:   steven.b.langer
steven.b.langer 🚫

@jimq2

Girl suing her HS administration because even though she graduated in the top 20% of her class, she could not read well enough to comprehend college textbooks

I just read the story, and this looks like a clear case of the school district failing her, she had undiagnosed Dyslexia so did not get the help she needed but as is the case with a lot of people with dyslexia she found ways around it which masked the problems she was having.

This does not let the school of they failed this young girl and god knows how many countless others. Unfortunately this is not a new phenomena and has been happening for years not just in the US, I know a young lad in uni now in the UK who at 16 had the reading age of an 8 year old, yet he was one of the top students in his school, he learnt to work around his condition which blinded a lot of his teachers to the problems he was having.

One of the big things I saw when looking at this article on Fox 8 was that A 2019 report from EdBuild, which promotes equity in public schools, found that majority non-white school districts get $23 billion less than districts that serve mostly white students.

If that is right then that is disgusting disparity.

Replies:   REP
REP 🚫

@steven.b.langer

who at 16 had the reading age of an 8 year old, yet he was one of the top students in his school, he learnt to work around his condition

If the student worked around his condition, I would expect him of having a higher reading grade level. However, a workaround based on taking additional time to read or reread a passage could result in the described result, especially on a timed RGL test.

jimq2 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

During the 70's, more than once, I was told I wouldn't be hired because they needed to hire more minorities (non-white, or female) to balance their workforce. In the 90's, I lost out on several jobs because I didn't speak Spanish. There are 2 examples of American white males being discriminated against.

Also in the 90's, there was a big stink when highly qualified HS students were denied admission to colleges to allow them to admit more lower qualified students to achieve "ethnic balance" on campus.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  julka
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@jimq2

With all due respect, I'm not sure that either of these examples are relevant to modern day Britain, given that they are from 50+ and 30+ years ago in the USA.

I'm not being a dick (well, not deliberately so) but I just don't see the relevance.

julka 🚫

@jimq2

In the 90's, I lost out on several jobs because I didn't speak Spanish. There are 2 examples of American white males being discriminated against.

There are plenty of American white men who speak spanish, and there were plenty of American white men who spoke spanish in the 90s. Your not getting hired because you don't have a specific skill doesn't sound like discrimination, it sounds like you not meeting requirements.

Replies:   jimq2
jimq2 🚫

@julka

No, it is catering to the local migrant population. Most of the legal residents speak English as they want to assimilate.

Replies:   julka
julka 🚫

@jimq2

That's still not discriminating against you because you're white, any more than if you had gotten passed over because you were unable to lift fifty pounds over your head. The job had a requirement, it sounds like it was a reasonable one for the environment, and you did not meet it.

Paladin_HGWT 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Maybe we've both just been very, very lucky, or maybe the idea that White Males are discriminated against is one of the biggest myths peddled by online "influencers" like a certain Mr Tate. I really wouldn't want to say which is the more likely.

I accept your experiences, and your perspective.

I joined the US Army in 1983; every promotion (above E4; E2 to E4 are mostly Time based, with some early promotion for college credits, or Distinguished Honor Grad at some military schools) there are Bonus Points awarded to Females, as well as Negros (Official Designation per the Federal Government of the USA; as in NAACP, or United Negro College Fund, etc.), Latino/Hispanic, "Native American" (as in one of the Recognized Tribes of Pre-Columbian peoples), or API (Asian - Pacific Islander).

The Bonus Points for promotion are equal to Two Years of College Credits, or having Earned a CIB (Combat Infantryman's Badge). This is publicly available information.

I have also sat on Promotion Boards for junior NCOs; requiring me to read the individuals Promotion Packets. I had to review my promotion packets with my Detailer, and Senior Rater.

It is the same when I apply for Federal or State/local Government jobs. (Because I am a disabled veteran, and unable to work at jobs I used to be able to do, I have applied for numerous Government jobs.) Many large corporations have similar "Preferences" for hiring and promotion.

There was a time when favoritism against Blacks, Latinos, and Females needed to be addressed. However, for some 40 years the Government has been bragging about Disproportionate employment against White Males. The demographics are public record.

Racism and Discrimination of any type is supposed to be illegal, but instead "reverse-racism" is celebrated.

I am nearly at the age of mandatory retirement, so I will never receive justice.

Replies:   jimq2  Marc Nobbs
jimq2 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

I ran into it through the 70's, then bought a semi and worked as self-employed. After I sold my truck in 1990 for health reasons, I ran into it again, plus being refused multiple jobs because I didn't speak Spanish.

I passed 65 more than 10 years ago, and had to keep working a low paying job for 10 more years to keep myself fed.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@Paladin_HGWT

Thanks for this. It does seem that positive discrimination has been more prominent in the US than it has in Britain, but again, this is based on my personal experience.

writernumber7 🚫
Updated:

@Gauthier

It must be comforting to hide your head in the sand, stick your fingers in your ears and pretend that free expression is it not under assault right under your nose.
When the police come for you because someone felt offended by one of your stories it will way too late. Not much different than that which occurred in Europe in the thirties, and just as many people screamed like many of you here, because it didn't happen to you, or right in front of you.

Replies:   Gauthier  Marc Nobbs  Grey Wolf
Gauthier 🚫

@writernumber7

When the police come for you because someone felt offended by one of your stories

Sorry, but you are totally insane. The worst offender on the freedom of expression are the Trump/Putin Nazis for which you are peddling nonsense attacking democratic governments.

Here is a quote from Projects 2025 which will definitively assert that you are full of shit:

Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of
transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance,
is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate
claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and
child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment Protection. Its
purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women.
Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute
it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it
should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications
and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.

So indeed the Trump goons will come to you for your stories, Cloudflare will be closed and you will not find any hosting anymore.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

When the police come for you because someone felt offended by one of your stories it will way too late. Not much different than that which occurred in Europe in the thirties, and just as many people screamed like many of you here, because it didn't happen to you, or right in front of you.

I mean, you're litterally referencing what the "famously left wing" Nazis did. And you can't even see it. I bet you think that because they called themselves "National Socialists" they really were left wing. Christ on a fucking bike read a fucking history book for Fuck's sake.

Sorry for being so coarse but sometimes the situation demands it.

Censorship comes far more often from the puritanical right than from the free thinking left. The right want you to conform, to stamp out difference. They want to shut down protest.

Here's a life tip - read some fucking Orwell. Then have a long hard look at the current US administration.

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

Here is a life tip, stop fighting with LeΓ³n e for the crime (in your eyes) of refusing to drink your chosen brand of kool-aid.

Grey Wolf 🚫

@writernumber7

free expression is it not under assault right under your nose.

Oh, free expression is definitely under assault in the US. We have a national leader who says his critics should be jailed for criticizing him, and who has appointed heads of federal law enforcement and justice agencies who support that view.

'Jail journalists who disagree with me' is absolutely an assault on free expression.

writernumber7 🚫

@writernumber7

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/08/10/why-we-must-fight-for-the-right-to-criticise-islam/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/22/islamists-are-bullying-britain-into-submission/

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

Spkied Online? Really? That's your source? Oh, my days. The evidence-free ramblings of one of the most ludicrous online grifters in the country? A man who always takes the contrarian position on any topic because it garners him the most clicks?

And Suella? The woman sacked from a government notorious for dealing in lies and fact-free rhetoric for being *too* dishonest? Braverman has trouble tripping over her own shoelaces, she's so useless.

Please. Don't give me "comment" pieces from right-wing grifters. How about some actual journalism from actual journalists?

Replies:   writernumber7
writernumber7 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

As with every left winger you attack the source and ignore the content, which is predominant in American education where ideas that challenge the revisionist left are canceled, censored, and often worse.

The gulf between is wide for this reason, you can't focus on the truth because your blinders keep you in constant attack mode. Everyone that doesn't conform to your approved opinion is automatically the enemy.

Replies:   Marc Nobbs  Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

My friend, you are not my enemy. I disagree with pretty much everything you have said, but that doesn't make you my enemy. You have attacked my country based on a misinterpretation of a click bait story, but you are not my enemy.

In truth I feel sorry for you. I feel sorry that you have been taken in by online grifters who care not one jot for your welfare, only for how much money your anger can make them. I feel sorry that you have such anger within you and I wonder what has happened to you to cause it and what can be done to ease it.

Because trust me, if everything you want to happen, happens, you will still be angry. The grifters will move on to the next sideshow that will rile you up and keep your dollars flowing their way.

This has already happened in Britain. The grifters who advocated for our departure from the EU got everything they wanted. And as predicted it wasn't enough and they moved right on to the next anger inducing grift.

This always happens. It *has* always happened.

You're better off taking that anger you have and channelling it into something good. Something worthwhile. Do something for your community. Something to help people. Help the homeless. Or the hungry. Set up a club to help young people, to get them off the street, away from the gangs and help them make something of their lives.

Because getting upset about a country on the other side of the world that you clearly have never been to and know nothing about what the actual lives of people who live there is like, is not doing you any good at all.

Marc Nobbs 🚫

@writernumber7

As with every left winger you attack the source and ignore the content,

I dismissed the links you provided because of who wrote the articles, that is true. The reason is that I have experience with both of them and found them to be unreliable at best and downright deliberately provocative at worst.

Breden O'Neill is a former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party, but is now a rabid right-wing libertarian provocateur. He consistently takes provocative contrarian positions, some of which often conflict with each other. Everything I've read from him in the past I've found lacking.

The article you linked to is an opinion piece based on a report in The Telegraph, which speculates about what may be the result of an ongoing review. The purpose of these articles is to influence the review, not inform the public. They have no basis in fact, or in good journalism.

The second article you linked to was by the former Home Secretary - widely regarded by people in her own party as the worst Home Secretary in history. She was sacked by two Prime Ministers, including Liz Truss, who was famously only in post for 42 days after a terrible budget caused the Financial Markets to crash and people's mortgage rates to skyrocket, and two weeks of her Premiership, the country stopped to mourn the passing of the Late Queen.

Suella Braverman is about as reliable a source as a dog's backside and produces the same kind of substance.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

including Liz Truss, who was famously only in post for 42 days after a terrible budget caused the Financial Markets to crash

Actually she was brought down by fintech and pension fund malpractice. By the metric of bond prices, Rachel Reeves is far worse.

Liz Truss tried to bring private sector growth strategy into the public sector. A radical experiment and it might have worked. Now we'll never know.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Actually she was brought down by fintech and pension fund malpractice. By the metric of bond prices, Rachel Reeves is far worse.

Truss's Premiership failed because she was a complete and utter fruit loopβ€”as evidenced by her conduct since being booted out of office by her constituents.

Throughout Johnson's time in office, it was evident that Truss would follow him and that she'd been an even more inappropriate holder of the highest office than he was (and that's saying something).

An utterly clueless meme-factory of a politician. I'll never understand how the membership initially chose her over Sunak.

The Tory party's transition from the polished (possibly too polished) Cameron to Truss in such a short space of time is so ludicrous that if it were pitched as a fiction storyline, it would have been rejected as too far-fetched.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Marc Nobbs

We completely disagree on that.

Truss's fall out with Kwasi Kwarteng and some of the asinine statements she's made since eliminate her as a great statesman. But for a politician, she was remarkably good at getting things done.

AJ

Replies:   Marc Nobbs
Marc Nobbs 🚫

@awnlee jawking

But for a politician, she was remarkably good at getting things done.

As you say, that's something we are not going to agree on.

Back to Top

 

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...

Storiesonline is for adult entertainment only. By accessing this site you declare that you are of legal age and that you agree with our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


Log In